Mearsheimer and Walt rely on discredited allegations and partial quotation. They twice quote David Ben-Gurion out of context so that he appears to be saying the exact opposite of what he actually did say. First, the authors have Ben-Gurion stating: ‘After the formation of a large army in the wake of the establishment of the state, we shall abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine.’ The clear implication is that this would be done by force. Yet, in a follow-up question, Ben-Gurion was asked whether he meant to achieve this ‘by force as well?’ He responded in the negative: ‘Through mutual understanding and Jewish-Arab agreement.’ Mearsheimer and Walt omit this important qualification. Ben-Gurion is then quoted as saying that ‘it is impossible to imagine general evacuation’ of the Arab population ‘without compulsion, and brutal compulsion’, which makes it seem as if Ben-Gurion was advocating ‘brutal compulsion’. They omit what he said next: ‘But we should in no way make it part of our programme.’ Either they were unaware of the context of the quotes because they read only misleading excerpts ripped out of context; or they decided to misuse the quotes so as to mislead the reader.

There are many other factual errors, but I will draw attention to just a few. ‘Israel,’ they state, ‘was explicitly founded as a Jewish state and citizenship is based on the principle of blood kinship.’ This mendacious emphasis on Jewish ‘blood’ is a favourite of neo-Nazi propaganda. It is totally false. A person of any ethnicity or religion can become an Israeli citizen. In fact, approximately a quarter of Israel’s citizens are not Jewish, a higher percentage of minority citizenry than nearly any other country. Indeed, Mearsheimer and Walt admit that Israel has 1.3 million Arab citizens – about 20 per cent of its population. The paper’s authors confuse Israel’s law of return – which was designed to grant asylum to victims of anti-semitism, including non-Jewish relatives of Jews – with its law of citizenship.

If Mearsheimer and Walt were truly concerned about racist citizenship statutes, they could have looked right next door to Jordan, which openly and explicitly refuses to grant citizenship to Jews. When asked by the New York Sun about Arab citizenship laws, Walt responded: ‘We were not writing on Saudi Arabia and Jordan.’ Mearsheimer and Walt in fact compare Israel to its Arab neighbours on several occasions, finding – incredibly – that ‘in terms of actual behaviour, Israel’s conduct is not morally distinguishable from the actions of its opponents.’ Walt’s evasive answer reminds me of a remark attributed to another Harvard administrator, A. Lawrence Lowell, who fought fiercely to keep Jews out of Harvard. His reasoning was that ‘Jews cheat.’ When it was pointed out to him that some non-Jews cheat, Lowell allegedly responded: ‘You’re changing the subject. I’m talking about Jews.’

Mearsheimer and Walt contend that the ‘United States has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel, not the other way around . . . There is no question, for example, that many al-Qaida leaders, including bin Laden, are motivated by Israel’s presence in Jerusalem and the plight of the Palestinians.’ In fact, bin Laden was primarily motivated by the presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia, recall, had asked the United States to defend the Arabian Peninsula against Iraqi aggression prior to the first Gulf War. So it was America’s ties to and defence of an Arab state – from which 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers originated – and not the Jewish state, that most clearly precipitated the events of 11 September 2001. Nor does Israel’s supposed domination of American public life explain the terrorist massacres in Bali, Madrid, London and elsewhere. Europe, after all, is praised for being less susceptible to the Lobby’s manipulation.

Mearsheimer and Walt’s boldest mis-statement concerns the negotiations at Camp David in July 2000. ‘Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s purportedly generous offer,’ they write, ‘would have given the Palestinians only a disarmed and dismembered set of Bantustans under de facto Israeli control.’ Barak has said that the Bantustan accusation was ‘one of the most embarrassing lies’ Arafat told about Camp David. Mearsheimer and Walt do not cite the map Dennis Ross published in his book The Missing Peace, which contrasts the Palestinian characterisation of the final proposal at Camp David with the actual proposal. The second map – the real map offered to the Palestinians at Camp David – shows a contiguous Palestinian state in the West Bank. Prince Bandar, a member of the Saudi royal family, was so astounded by the generosity of Israel’s offer that he told Arafat: ‘If we lose this opportunity, it is not going to be a tragedy. This is going to be a crime.’

Even if the scholarship were sound and the facts accurate, the paper’s thesis would remain unsound. Their first argument is that the very existence of an Israeli lobby proves that support for Israel is essentially un-American. ‘The mere existence of the Lobby,’ they write, ‘suggests that unconditional support for Israel is not in the American national interest. If it was, one would not need an organised special interest group to bring it about.’ In other words, any group that needs a lobby must be working against the ‘American national interest’. The most powerful lobby in the US is, in fact, the American Association of Retired Persons. According to Mearsheimer and Walt’s logic, that would mean that the rights of retired people are inconsistent with American national interests, as is equality for African Americans (NAACP) and choice for women. The reality, of course, is that virtually all interest groups and many foreign countries undertake lobbying, but only the ‘Israel Lobby’ is accused of being contrary to American national interest.

Maybe Beijing believes that it's not in China's interest right now to help the Bush administration. There are a lot of things to suggest that they are using the US focus on the Middle East to expand the chinese powerbase in the oil-rich regions of Africa. [/IQUOTE]

When Palestinian terrorists blow up buses in places such as Tel Aviv, killing as many as a dozen people at a time, I view it as an immoral act. I don't put that forward as some kind of new and higher moral insight on my part - practically any sane person will accept that bombing a bus and killing a dozen or two of its passengers is evil.

Or will they?

It turns out that the Israel government and its advocates regularly justify actions such as blowing up buses as 'self defense', 'a proportionate response', etc.

Today Israeli airstrikes blew up a bus, killing as many as 15 or 18 Lebanese civilians, depending on reports.

The great moral error of the Israeli government is its proposition that all acts carried out to allegedly defend the Israeli state are in and of themselves moral. The rest of the world is supposed to agree to that questionable proposition and to waive any other moral considerations.

Tragically, the US does buy into this questionable morality, sends an endless supply of weaponry to the Israeli state, and shields it diplomatically at the UN and elsewhere. Others, such as the spineless EU, remain silent in the face of current atrocities.

I cannot credit your statement that actions of terror-supporting governments (or indeed 'governments', in the case of Hamas) are greated by silence, as we have had numerous threads on here dealing with Hamas, the Iranian regime, Syria, etc.

As for the view that merely pointing rockets at a state is, in and of itself, an act of war, this is the strangest definition of an act of war I have ever heard. For many years, the US and the Soviet Union had rockets pointing at each other - no-one seriously argued that either side was committing an act of war against the other.

Very true. And the US have just voted against another UN resolution against Israel. Which means the UN can´t do nothing to try and easy the situation diplomatically.

I´m sure Cheney and his friends are happy that the oil price is expected to go over $80/ barrel.

On another note - I don´t really understand NBCs view, or the view of other conservatives - and again, you can see in this thread that it is the Bush-supporters who also support Israel´s aggressions.

It is comparable to Saddam invading Kuwait. It makes no difference to the aggression itself if Isreal is a democracy on paper and Iraq was a dictatorship.

If you attack a country, you attack a country. If you fight against terrorism, you fight against terrorism. Period. One would think that some people have learned their lesson - but they didn´t want to learn it in the first place.

Israel had no right to attack Lebanon. There were democratic elections. And Hezbollah was elected, so they are put into power by the people. Indeed, maybe Lebanon could have been an example of democracy for Iraq. Or the other way round? Iraq an example for Lebanon? Ooops no... a lil´ too much civil war there.

Yes, Hezbollah is an aggressive terror organization. They should have been disarmed long time ago.

But again, this strike does NOT fight terror. This military tactic is crystal clear to Israel, the U.S. and everyone else involved. You just don´t go around to drop a few bombs on you enemies´airport and yeah, lets include a bus so we have some civilian casualities so Israelis feel that they have had their REVENGE in civilian "casualities" too. The word casuality alone is wrong. The Israelis bomb this bus on PURPOSE.

All this way of thinking is ILL and SICK and far off from religion. This act makes the Israelis just as bad terrorists as their enemies.

It is not about defense. The other side will always say we´re defending ourselves. The Hezbollah will say we´re defending ourselves against the aggressor Israel that has occupied our land waaaaay back when.

I invite you to open your eyes and see this bullshit for what it is.

Israel´s leaders feel so strong with its nuclear devices, with all the support from the U.S. They are killing people. The Hezbollah leaders feel so strong with the support coming from Syria and countless individuals who fight for them underground. They are killing people.

In the name of their religion, in the name of their country, in the name of their society, in the name of revenge.

And the U.S. supports it! (Well, what did we expect). Like always, the U.S. will support a little nice war in another region (faaaaar from homebase), especially if it is as stabile as the Near East, Hell, maybe we´re all lucky and can sell more arms! And use more oil for the planes and tanks! And get the oil prices higher! After all, who cares about NBC´s gas bill - except of Venezuela, maybe.

Oh yes, the U.S. has voted the other members of the Security Council down. Because, you know, they are always wrong.. they don´t get it, do they, when Israel or the US are attacking they call it defense Or pre-emptive strike, haha.

A little telephone call from the Israeli government to Bush: Yea cowboy, is it ok if we also bomb Syria a little? Bush: Hell yeah! Great idea! Lebanon is to weak anyway, but Syria,.. yeah go ahead, let´s create another conflict in the region that can last for a decade! I will support you, you will need more arms my dear Jewish friends!

I would like to thank each and every one of you for your responses and comments (both pro and con) about this terrible situation.

I've received a barrage of emails from my overseas friends, all expressing concern for my safety and support for our cause. I appreciate each email and all of your concerns. It's amazing how the internet can bring total strangers together, isn't it? It's marvelous. I feel that I'm not alone and that I have a large community looking out for me and my country.

Regardless of whether or not you support our campaign against the Hizbollah, I'm sure you'll all join me in the fervent wish that it will end quickly, for the benefit of the suffering Lebanese people as well as for us.

One thing is for sure - when this campaign ends, Hizbollah won't be able to threaten ANYONE, much less Israel.....

Originally posted by AchtungBono I would like to thank each and every one of you for your responses and comments (both pro and con) about this terrible situation.

I've received a barrage of emails from my overseas friends, all expressing concern for my safety and support for our cause. I appreciate each email and all of your concerns. It's amazing how the internet can bring total strangers together, isn't it? It's marvelous. I feel that I'm not alone and that I have a large community looking out for me and my country.

Regardless of whether or not you support our campaign against the Hizbollah, I'm sure you'll all join me in the fervent wish that it will end quickly, for the benefit of the suffering Lebanese people as well as for us.

One thing is for sure - when this campaign ends, Hizbollah won't be able to threaten ANYONE, much less Israel.....

I thank you all so much for your continued support and comments.

Peace!

XXX
Elaine

When the campaign ends?

What campaign do you mean? The election campaign?

Let´s call an attack an attack, shall we? Or how does the Propaganda in Israel call it?

And please, in all your national Jewish ecstasy, don´t be too sure about your success. It needs more than that "campaign", as you call it, to get rid of terrorists. I predict they will survive in the underground and they will continue to give Israel trouble.

Originally posted by A_Wanderer No, Saddam invaded and annexed Kuwait making the country simply no longer exist, there were not terrorists making acts of war against Iraq from within Kuwait, they are entirely different situations.

from wikipedia:

After being allied with Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War until its end in 1988 (Kuwait paid Iraq to protect it from what it perceived as a threat posed by Iran), Kuwait was invaded and annexed by Iraq (under Saddam Hussein) on August 2, 1990.

Hussein's primary justifications included a charge that Kuwaiti territory was in fact an Iraqi province, and that annexation was retaliation for "economic warfare" Kuwait allegedly had waged through slant drilling into oil supplies on Iraqi territories.

---Kuwait also was a MONARCHY, not a DEMOCRACY like Lebanon -Kuwait leaders were not elected, and there wasn´t any parliament at all.

Quote:

Originally posted by A_Wanderer Hezbollah is not Hamas and they do not have the full mandate of the people to rule Lebanon, they only have 23 out of 128 in the Lebanese parliament.

Only? Isn´t that enough in a democracy?

You´re constructing a right to attack the whole country Lebanon because a terrorist organization "only" has 23 out of 128 seats in the parliament?

Like Wanderer said, Hezbelloh controls the south of Lebanon so how can the Lebanese government which is anti-Syrian control Hezbelloh which is one of the conditions for Israel's ceasefire? The Lebanese government has no more control of Hezbelloh than you or I. Are the attacks actually harming Hezbelloh, are they losing members of their group, is the leadership being destroyed, are they disarming, probably none of this is happening. Is the infrastructure of Lebanon being destroyed, yep and this after Lebanon has been making progress after the years of violence.

I sincerely doubt that these attacks will stop Hezbelloh, actually they are probably gaining more recruits with every missile strike. So long as these two groups continue this pattern, we will be discussing this 5 years from now, 10 years and so on. A sad part of the world indeed and unfortunately, the present US president ( and he has successfully seduced our bonehead PM into agreeing with his every policy) has no interest in playing peacemaker so this could continue to escalate, hopefully not. Combined with the accusations by India upon Pakistan, the North Korea situation, the Iran situation, and Iraq, not to mention the conflicts in Africa, the world is in a shitstorm right now and the US itself is headed for what some predict will be an overly active hurricane season with New Orleans and much of the Gulf region still in shambles. 2006 could be a banner year.

I sincerely doubt that these attacks will stop Hezbelloh, actually they are probably gaining more recruits with every missile strike

This i very much agree with. It is true that Hezbelloh need to be stopped, but by completely going over the top, bombing the shit out of a city where Hezbollah arn't there is not doing ANYTHING but provoking people who otherwise wouldn't really get all hepped up over it. Obviously there is so much hatred between the isrealis and their neighbours, but COME ON. There has been bad blood between the jews and the arabs for centuries. Then after World War 2, who's GREAT idea was it to go in an annex arab land and give it back to the jews. I mean, how arrogant can someone be to go live in a place that would be the WORST place on earth to move back too. And then for the Arabs to see how much support the "west" or specifically the states give to the israelis ad their army, would further incite and fuel the already high level of hatred between the extremist groups of both parties. It's a very sad scary situation.

But i think we need to step back and look at the big picture. Saying things like 'Israel can steam over the other countries' and 'when this is over Hexbollah will be no more' etc, this is talking about HUMAN LIVES. Do you think if the shit hits the fan and Israel goes into bat with their nukes and "superior" army against Lebanon, Syria and Iran that only soldiers and people willing to die for the fight are going to die? No. The fact is thousands of innocent people will die, purely because they are deadlocked between two factions who are too blinded by rightiousness and hatred to see anything objectively. Already too many civilians have died from both sides, and although i am helpless to offer another way of getting through this mess (the UN obviously can't do a damn thing!) it saddens me to think of men women and children who will die in the name of WHAT? because of this.

Let´s call an attack an attack, shall we? Or how does the Propaganda in Israel call it?

And please, in all your national Jewish ecstasy, don´t be too sure about your success. It needs more than that "campaign", as you call it, to get rid of terrorists. I predict they will survive in the underground and they will continue to give Israel trouble.

Regardless of that, I also wish you stay safe. Be careful.

I respect your opinion and I thank you very much for your kind wishes - regardless of your opinion I know you don't want any harm to come to me.

As for your post, Ok, you're right - it IS an attack - an attack against a devlish organization who has the nerve to call themselves the "party of god". It's an attack against a terrorist organization holed up in the southern region of a sovereign nation, thus causing that nation unnecessary suffering. An attack against a terrorist organization that DELIBERATELY fires missiles and rockets at our civilian population.

I realize that you have a very strong opinion against what we're doing. Is there any way I can explain it to you? I don't know where you live so I have no idea if you've lived under the constant threat of terrorism that I've been living under. If you did, then you'd know that eventually there comes a breaking point to the amount of abuse we can take before we strike out against those who seek our destruction.

Palestinian terrorists hijacked an Air France plane to Entebbe Uganda in 1976 - Israel sent the air force thousands of miles to rescue them and bring them home.

Palestinian terrorists massacred 11 Israeli atheletes at the 1972 Olympics in Munich. Israel sent a crack hit team to the four corners of the earth to kill the masterminds one by one.

In 1981 Iraq was developing nuclear weapons which would have put the entire region at risk. Israeli planes flew to Iraq and destroyed their reactor.

Since 1987, Hamas has committed hundreds of suicide bombings against our population. Israel set out to destroy the terrorist leaders - including Sheikh Yassin and Rantissi.

All these examples should demonstrate our reactions to provocations against us.

Its important to remember how this campaign...oops....ATTACK started: it started with the Hizbollah raiding an Israeli outpost, killing three soldiers and taking two prisoners. Israel has been pushed to the limit so many times before, but this was the last straw. Over the past few years, Hizbollah has had free reign in Southern Lebanon, with the Lebanese government powerless to stop them. Many times, they have fired mortars at our northern settlements and we've done nothing - not this time. This time we decided not just to mount a campaign to bring the prisoners home, but to virtually wipe out the Hizbollah existance in south Lebanon and to let the legitimate government forces in Lebanon get their sovereignty back over their own territory.

We have no war with the Lebanese people or with the people of any other of our neighbours. Our fight is with the forces of evil who seek to destroy us even at the expense of their own citizenry. The terrorists place their headquarters and ammunition depots in the heart of populated areas so they blame us and cry crocodile tears when civillians get killed during our defensive attacks. I've said this before and I'll say it again....Israel NEVER targets innocent civillians. We deplore and mourn any innocent loss of life, but at the same time we will never give up our right to defend ourselves against our enemies.

You cannot cut and paste all the terrible things palestinians have done without putting up a list of all the things israelis have done. You cannot say you have only acted in defense the whole time, because we all know that is simply not true.

Quote:

Palestinian terrorists massacred 11 Israeli atheletes at the 1972 Olympics in Munich. Israel sent a crack hit team to the four corners of the earth to kill the masterminds one by one.

Uhm, and this is fair judgement. I thought you lived in a democracy governed by rules. Don't you have a judicial system that would put these men to trial rather then sending a 'crack team' to murder them all? IS this how an advanced "defensive" nation would act? I don't think so.

Quote:

We deplore and mourn any innocent loss of life, but at the same time we will never give up our right to defend ourselves against our enemies.

Do you not believe this is what the palestinians and other groups believe as well?

I mean, I definately am not condoning defending your country, but I dont' believe Israel is an 'innocent' as it likes to make out. I mean in my other post I said how silly it was for the jewish people to move back to a place they left long ago and to be fair everyone can see it was such a mistake to do, but to be fair your there, generations have come and it would be wrong to move you all out.

Have you ever heard of the Balfour declaration? The history of Zionism goes back before the holocaust.

Also it is shitty that they are going for Beirut and not the real strongholds of Hezbollah, the Lebanese only just threw out the Syrians and now they are on the front lines of the proxy war between Iran - Syria and Israel.

You cannot cut and paste all the terrible things palestinians have done without putting up a list of all the things israelis have done. You cannot say you have only acted in defense the whole time, because we all know that is simply not true.

Uhm, and this is fair judgement. I thought you lived in a democracy governed by rules. Don't you have a judicial system that would put these men to trial rather then sending a 'crack team' to murder them all? IS this how an advanced "defensive" nation would act? I don't think so.

Do you not believe this is what the palestinians and other groups believe as well?

I mean, I definately am not condoning defending your country, but I dont' believe Israel is an 'innocent' as it likes to make out. I mean in my other post I said how silly it was for the jewish people to move back to a place they left long ago and to be fair everyone can see it was such a mistake to do, but to be fair your there, generations have come and it would be wrong to move you all out.

But where do you go from here?

Thanks for your post.

You list "all the things Israel has done" - can you please give me just ONE example of what you mean?
btw - it was not a cut and paste - I actually LIVED through each and every case, I was citing from memory.

As for our being here, there has always been a Jewish presence in the land of Israel. At no time was there ever NOT a Jewish presence. Its true that there have been many conquests of the land by the Romans, Turks, Ottomans, and the British Mandate, but ultimately we regained our sovereignty in 1948 and, like it or not, we are here to stay.

While re-affirming our commitment to the land, we've always acknowledged the Palestinians living among us. As far back as 1948, when Israel was the size of a postage stamp (when there were no occupied territories), Israel agreed to the "partition plan" establishing two states in Palestine - Jewish and Arab. However, the Arabs rejected any plan that would leave us here on "their" land, and have continued to do so ever since.

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the Palestinian people want the same thing that we do - peace and quiet, the right to live our daily lives without worrying about whether or not we were going to make it home that night or not. The Palestinians are a peaceful people who have the same right to statehood as we do. However, this right must not mean that our safety should be compromised.

We've tried negotiating peace settlements with our neighbours for year - finally achievening this with Egypt and Jordan. In 1993 we swallowed hard and signed the Oslo accords with the PLO, which were supposed to guarantee Palestinian statehood within 5 years following Israeli withdrawals from territories captured in 1967. Unfortunately those accords went down the drain following the assasination of Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin and the subsequent suicide attacks by Hamas which followed.

In 1997 or 1998 (if memory serves me correctly), former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak made the unheard-of proposal to give back 94% of the West Bank to the Palestinians, which would virtually guarantee their eventual statehood within acceptable borders. Yassar Arafat made the fatal error of rejecting this proposal.

The final blow to Oslo occured with the start of the Palestinian "Intifada" in 2000.

With the death of Arafat, the Intifada ended and a new prospect of peace appeared on the horizon. Unfortunately, the Palestinian government missed that opportunity also by allowing the Hamas terrorists to continue attacks against us.

In 2004, realizing that we had no one to talk to on the other side, former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon did what no Israeli PM before him ever did - he took the decision to make a unilateral withdawal from settlements in the Gaza Strip. In August 2005, thousands of settlers were evacuated and the land given to the Palestinians. At the same time, elections were held in the PA which brought the Hamas to power - effectively ENDING negotiations.

Meantime, in the areas vacated by Israel, Hamas (now in power) settled in and added a dangerous element to their attacks against us - Quassam rockets aimed at the city of Sderot.

In order to stop the attacks against Sderot, Israel launched an offensive against the Hamas terrorists in Gaza.

Which brings us to today.

I really hope I didn't bore you with everything I said but it is so important for me to try and explain to you why we sometimes have to go on the offensive. It is in direct response to actions against us.

Originally posted by AchtungBono
I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the Palestinian people want the same thing that we do - peace and quiet, the right to live our daily lives without worrying about whether or not we were going to make it home that night or not. The Palestinians are a peaceful people who have the same right to statehood as we do. However, this right must not mean that our safety should be compromised.

It's nice and diplomatic that this is said from both parties. Yet, here you guys are.